The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

many thanks Duncan for your help also in this case ... :clap: :clap: :clap:
ADM_192_96_188_Phillips_02.jpg
ADM_192_96_188_Phillips_02.jpg (51.06 KiB) Viewed 1637 times
I have nothing more to say, since the evidence speaks for itself.

@ Alberto,

I agree with you. Well said !

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote:Hi all,
apart from Duncan, who is still expressing his point of view in a composed way (even if I disagree with him), I have to notice that other people, overwhelmed by the evidence of the removal of Capt.Phillips done by WW and Tovey, are just able to address their annoyance mentioning tasteless comments about Italians..... :kaput:

Of course, they can be sure that I will never use the same kind of too easy arguments against them. :lol:

I think everybody has understood how things happened for Capt.Phillips.

Bye, Alberto
Removing an RN captain from command of his ship was not something that was done lightly. It sounds like Phillips simply worked himself until he finally had a break down. All his subsequent reviews imply that he probably took too much upon himself which would lead to overwork and collapse. Quite a number of Captains and commanding officers suffered breakdowns during the war, and were then removed on medical grounds.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

that is your opinion and I respect it.

Of course my one is completely different, ... based on what happened on August 1941, ... and given the evidence at hand.

I like to take this occasion to applaude Capt Alfred Jerome Lucian Phillips dignity : :clap:
Capt_Alfred_Jerome_Lucian_Phillips.jpg
Capt_Alfred_Jerome_Lucian_Phillips.jpg (11.92 KiB) Viewed 1771 times


Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1580
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson »

I'm wondering what is more dangerous: A Captain in command of a ship on patrol service far away or a Captain inside the network of the Admiralty?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

that is your opinion and I respect it.

Of course my one is completely different, ... based on what happened on August 1941, ... and given the evidence at hand.

Bye Antonio :D
You can't use your "opinion" on a such a sensitive topic, the reasons for Phillip's relief as Captain of Norfolk is on file somewhere and it is incumbent upon you find it. In any event, there was always a rotation of officers through the command system, often alternating between sea and shore based appointments.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi Duncan,
I agree that rotation and war fatigue could have been an explanation for this specific case.

However I'm ready to accept one or two coincidences, not too many (and all in the same direction: to justify the 3 involved officers):
- the 6:13 typo for the retreat of the PoW in WW and Tovey reports.....
- the number of guns in action for the same ship (from 3 to 9).....-
- the damages and casualties sustained by PoW (e.g. the number of victims within the enclosed compass platform, the hits on the crane and the HALA directors)......
- the first board signed declarations and sketches of all Norfolk officers.....
- the second board commission avoiding to ask to anybody the estimated distance from Hood (except to WW of course)....
- the changed declaration of WW himself who was able to see the Hood up to near the waterline one day (first board) but able to see only the funnels and the upper superstructure another day (second board).....
- the support to his declarations provided mainly by his staff members....
- the mirage effect that affected only the Suffolk (and, possibly, as suggested by Wadinga also the poor Capt.Phillips)....
- the "poor" gunnery report of Norfolk on May 24, with incorrect timings and range variations...
- the "Plot" being an incorrect document presented only to support a changed distance, containing an incorrect trace for BC1, incomplete bearings ending in the middle of the sea and an enlarged battlefield (with Pinchin's written disclaimer on the same Plot regarding bearings and ranges)....
- etc.

No, sorry, there are too many circumstantial evidences that proof the "embellishment" of this story to allow decorations and propaganda instead of an inquiry. IMHO, Phillips was removed because he refused to keep silent, outlining in the most shocking and embarrassing way that distance from Hood as declared by WW and his staff was incorrect.
Capt. Phillips: ".....NORFOLK was fine on the starboard quarter of our heavy ships, both of which were plainly visible from near the waterline upwards..........After a few minutes of action I observed what appeared to me to be a hit, which I should estimate to be on or near the starboard above water torpedo tubes. This hit, which was quite separate in time from the firing of HOOD's salvoes, had the appearance of a brilliant splash of flame, as I have tried to indicate in rough sketch Phase I. I remarked on this to Admiral Wake-Walker and suggested that she had been hit near the torpedo tubes."

If this is not a " j'accuse ! " after his boss WW shamefully changed his version declaring that he was able to see just the upper super-structure....

Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Alberto Virtuani wrote:

IMHO, Phillips was removed because he refused to keep silent, outlining in the most shocking and embarrassing way that distance from Hood as declared by WW and his staff was incorrect.
This is, quite frankly, an insane conclusion.

No one cared about the distance to Hood at the inquiry, because it wasn't relevant to the battle; again it was the distance to Bismarck from Norfolk that mattered. Phillip's COs stated that he was "conscientious", "zealous" and "had plenty of foresight and was prepared to act on his own" yet you claim that Phillips would have approached Bismarck to within effective gun range and then failed to open fire is support of Holland (Why? Did W-W hate Holland?) because W-W cowardly decided not to engage Bismarck. Yet there's nothing from Phillips in his own report stating that he was within effective gun range and/or was ordered not to engage, nor does his gunnery officer state that he was within effective range.

As I stated before, Phillips was the captain of Norfolk and it was his decision to open fire, or not, on Bismarck.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by paulcadogan »

Hi Antonio, Alberto and everyone,

I was not intending to comment any further on this topic, but really and truly I have to say something here. This attempt to link Captain Phillips being given a new appointment in the Admiralty to retribution for his inquiry testimony is patently ridiculous!!

Take a look at Norfolk's chronology for the first two years of the war:

http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono ... orfolk.htm

After the intensity of the Bismarck chase, within days Norfolk was back at sea, then after a respite in July and August while under refit, she went on to the Russian convoys - and we all have at least read what the Arctic convoys were like. Are you saying Wake-Walker made it all up to get him off the ship and into an important position in the Admiralty as punishment? But hang on... a month after Phillips, WW was removed from sea-going command too! Hmmmm....looks like Phillips went and conspired with Admiral Pound (who would have been glad for an opportunity to get back at Tovey!) to get that job done! :shock: After all, they were at the Admiralty at the same time, so must have had opportunities to talk! The Plot thickens!!! COME ON!! :stubborn:

Antonio, right now I think you are into overkill and it is not doing anything to help the cause of Vice Admiral Holland's reputation.

I couldn't help but remember this movie clip - start at about the 5-minute mark: (Good for a laugh, but still it says a lot when it comes to interpretation of "evidence".)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFyw39S ... E778E4594F

Respectfully as always,

Paul
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Paul Cadogan,

you are absolutely right, ... apart the long list of " coincidence " Alberto provided above, ... there are 2 things here that are absolutely ridiculous and should deserve a movie like the one you are proposing :

1) The PoW turn away at 06.01 and 30 seconds becoming 06.13 ( adding more than 10 minutes )

2) The 10 sea miles declaration of Wake-Walker becoming 15 sea miles using " The Plot " ( adding 50% distance ).

You can comment in any way you like, nothing will change the facts.

Reasons, ... we have long discussed about it, ... in full extent and details and you are right, ... now I am on the overkill of all this so many evidence have been correlated in many ways.

It is a fact that during the war they applied those guidelines, also to the Denmark Strait events, ... and consequently they have been managed, ... just like many other events, ... accordingly :
Guidelines received by Admiral John Godfrey ( Naval Intelligence Director ) from Sir Winston Churchill on September 1939.

Good news was made to seem better; bad news was toned down, delayed or sometimes suppressed.

From : David Reynolds - In Command of History - London - Penguin 2005 at page 114.
It this case they went from a deserved inquiry, ... to medals and recognitions ... for propaganda needs.

As simple as that ...

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Dunmunro wrote: " ....again it was the distance to Bismarck from Norfolk that mattered. ...."
Hi Duncan, exactly!
However the distance of Norfolk to Hood (due to relative bearings) nails Norfolk to around 11 miles to BS at 6:00. This is the point WW desperately needed to hide with his modified declarations supported by the incorrect "Plot". Phillips (who was heard after WW...) just contradicted this attempt with a more than clear "j'accuse!":
Rear Adm Wake-Walker: ".....I think you will find that from 30,000 yards the only thing you can see of the "HOOD" is probably the top of her superstructure and her funnels and bridge, and therefore it is quite impossible for me to say at what deck level it was. "
Capt. Phillips: ".....NORFOLK was fine on the starboard quarter of our heavy ships, both of which were plainly visible from near the waterline upwards..........After a few minutes of action I observed what appeared to me to be a hit, which I should estimate to be on or near the starboard above water torpedo tubes. This hit, which was quite separate in time from the firing of HOOD's salvoes, had the appearance of a brilliant splash of flame, as I have tried to indicate in rough sketch Phase I. I remarked on this to Admiral Wake-Walker and suggested that she had been hit near the torpedo tubes."
Please note the last underlined sentence: he said WW COULD in no way have stated that he was able to see just the upper super-structure of the ship..... :shock:



@Paul Cadogan: welcome back Paul ! I disagree (but it's just my feeling) that the position given to Phillips was a promotion. In wartime any officer wants to be at sea commanding a ship. Whether it was or not, it depends on the mission and operative tasks of this division (and looking at the composition of the team, I would say it was not such an important place to be......) :wink:

In any case I agree that the Phillips "rotation" in itself could have been interpreted just as a normal new appointment. However all the other "innocent errors" to embellish the DS story cannot be considered just "innocent errors" when you put them all together:
  • - the 6:13 "typo" for the retreat of the PoW in WW and Tovey reports when PoW official maps were available.....
    - the number of guns in action for the same ship (from 3 to 9).....-
    - the damages and casualties sustained by PoW (e.g. the number of victims within the enclosed compass platform, the hits on the crane and the HALA directors)......
    - the first board signed declarations and sketches of all Norfolk officers.....
    - the second board commission carefully avoiding to ask to anybody their estimated distance from Hood (except to WW of course)....
    - the changed declaration of WW himself who was able to see the Hood up to near the waterline one day (first board) but able to see only the funnels and the upper superstructure another day (second board).....
    - the support to his declarations provided mainly by his staff members....
    - the "mirage" that affected only the Suffolk (and, possibly, as per Sean, also the poor Capt.Phillips) but never the Germans....
    - the "poor" gunnery report of Norfolk, with incorrect timings/range variations (not even matching the Norfolk course)....
    - the "Plot" being an incorrect document presented only to support a changed distance, containing an incorrect trace for BC1, incomplete bearings ending in the middle of the sea and an enlarged battlefield (with Pinchin's written disclaimer on the same Plot regarding the bearings and the ranges....)
    - etc. etc.
Am I too suspicious ? Possibly I am, but not to be, after all these "innocent errors", it's a bit difficult for me.... :think: :think: :think:

Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Alberto,

I’m appalled by the way you assign a inaccurate opinion to me about all Italians, simply on the basis of my nomination of three notable Italian politicians. I am very well-disposed to the Italian people in general and particular, having visited the country many times for both business and pleasure. You are both thinking bad and sinning. However, unlike Dunmunro “
who is still expressing his point of view in a composed way
” I don’t post “
This is, quite frankly, an insane conclusion
.” :shock:

Let’s add a fourth politician to the list, the one you quoted, and apparently agree with “
You sin in thinking bad about people - but, often, you guess right.
” Giulio Andreotti, 41st Italian Prime Minister, unusual amongst European premiers in being indicted for both association with the Mafia and murder. After being convicted for the latter and sentenced to 24 years he was later absolved. The Wikipedia article highlights many interesting features of Italian legal procedure and a pertinent comment on the court cases. According to Andreotti's lawyers the prosecution case was based on conjecture and inference, without any concrete proof of direct involvement by Andreotti. For over two years we have seen this same technique used against the reputations of various RN officers. Plus ca change as they say in France! :cool:

But back to the matter…….

“the "mirage" that affected only the Suffolk (and, possibly, as per Sean, also the poor Capt.Phillips)”

Paymaster Bailey on the Compass platform with Phillips saw the optical illusion as well “
64. You have told us the glow of the original fire did not appear to extend above the boat deck. If that is so how did you see it?
I can only think that it was an optical illusion, due to the distance


Antonio, thanks for correcting me on Phillips’ second witness date, no less than 96 days after the events he had seen. You assert his superior officer engineered that as soon as a mere 145 days after that he was removed from the ship with a glowing personal report....... from Wake-Walker (his superior).

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

Captain Phillips, ... just like Commander Luce, ... only confirmed what he had signed and sketched at the First board just few days after the event, when his declarations, ... just like all the other HMS Norfolk witnesses including Wake-Walker, ... have been considered in this way by the First Board :
Final Report of the First Enquiry into the Loss of HMS Hood
The Board comprised:
Vice-Admiral Sir Geoffrey Blake, KCB, DSO, RN (President)
Captain C.F. Hammill, RN
Captain C.H.J Harcourt, CBE, RN,

Evidence from Norfolk

Norfolk was not in action. Although Hood was at a range of 20,000 yards, she was clearly visible. Being the leading ship, Hood was in no way obscured by smoke or firing from Prince of Wales. Hood, being the Senior Officer's ship, was closely watched; in fact, two signal ratings had their telescopes on her all the time. From a long distance point of view, the evidence is considered reliable and this is borne out by the reasonably consistent statements of the majority of the witnesses.
Now you can read again what has been changed at the Second Board, ... using which type of reference ( The Plot ) ... and only one Officer declaration ( RearAdm Wake-Walker ), ... while both Capt Phillips and Commander Luce confirmation to the Second Board ... has been completely disregarded with a simple annotation ( A mirage effect ).
Summary of findings of Second Board (Walker)

Rear-Admiral H.T.C. Walker, RN (President)
Captain H.E. Morse, DSO, RN,
Captain L.D. Mackintosh, DSC, RN.

Norfolk's Evidence

The plot gives Norfolk's distance from Hood as 15 miles. A mirage effect was also noticeable from her but it is not considered likely that more than a general effect could be observed. Rear-Admiral Wake-Walker's evidence is confident and clear.
@ Paul Cadogan,

you to rate how ridiculous the above event was. For me it has been just a shame.

Not a surprise that after ... Capt Phillips had to pay for it ... and he did pay.

Since you like movies, ... and on the one you proposed above I like the Black Knight scene as Sean (Wadinga) well knows, ...

Here my proposal for you to think about, ... it is a good movie and the last sentence by Colonel Sterling ( played by Denzel Washington ) deserve a deep thought, ... referencing this thread.
Courage_under_fire.jpg
Courage_under_fire.jpg (98.31 KiB) Viewed 1672 times
In order to honor the Hood crew and ViceAdm L. Holland memory, ... we need to tell the truth : " ... the whole, hard, .. cold truth ".

Until we do that ... we dishonor them ... even if their bell is coming home.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

@Wadinga
Hi Sean, nothing personal, but please let's try to avoid stereotypes about the different nationalities. I know you personally and I'm sure you didn't mean to offend.
"You sin in thinking bad about people - but, often, you guess right."
Well done Sean ! :clap: :clap: :clap: You got Giulio Andreotti despite my poor translation. Andreotti is still a very controversial political personality and his links with the mafia, the Middle-East "debatable" personalities, etc. are still debated in Italy, even if I must admit he was a very clever and smart politician and I like his aphorisms......

As per Andreotti case, I can imagine that an inquiry done after the DS would have discharged the officers (war time propaganda and RN morale reasons).

This does not mean that after 75 years the "History" cannot be changed highlighting who did his duty and who did only partially......

Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello Alberto,

Whilst you are reviewing things might you retract unconditionally?
IMHO, Phillips was removed because he refused to keep silent, outlining in the most shocking and embarrassing way that distance from Hood as declared by WW and his staff was incorrect.
Since it was a full 146 days (including Russian convoy duty) between him allegedly shocking and embarrassing W-W, and him leaving Norfolk after two years of demanding war service and Wake-Walker giving him a Glowing, sympathetic and friendly personal assessment, there is no indication it was anything other than a routine re-assignment, such as is common in all fighting forces. Your own peacetime sea-time will have allowed you to imagine the stress under which every captain with his men's lives and the Nation's interests at risk lived, together with often trying to stay awake 24 hours a day would put on any human body.

This has been a recently-developed smokescreen to divert attention away from original maps that aren't original, witnesses who don't confirm a mere ten miles and an obssession (but not an insane one :angel: ) with the veracity with a hastily-concocted diagram from the first Enquiry based on pure guesswork, lack of thought and nothing else.
However the distance of Norfolk to Hood (due to relative bearings) nails Norfolk to around 11 miles to BS at 6:00
If you believe Phillips, then you have to believe Norfolk was
fine on Hood's starboard quarter
and
Hood bore Red 025
as another witness put it. Whatever part of Hood's track you select to put Norfolk in to achieve this relative bearing, she is never within 11 miles of Bismarck.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

@ Wadinga,

Sean, I hope you do not need me to explain you again " The Plot " and how it has been done by Pinchin, ... which enormous errors does contain in order to enlarge the battlefield as needed/requested to him.

Just go on the dedicated thread and read it again, ... especially your preferred bearing at 06.20 between Norfolk and Suffolk.

The Hood Second board of Inquiry, ... disregarded Capt. Phillips and Luce declarations/confirmation, ... and the Hood First board correct assessment of distance between Norfolk and Hood, ... accepting that incorrect document produced by Wake-Walker.

RearAdm Wake-Walker changed his first board declaration, ... on a shameful and ridiculous way, ... by the use of that document done on purpose for his needs.

No further comments, ... I think it is clear enough ...

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
Locked